Most people like us on this forum realize the difference between crank HP and RWHP. But I think car companies should start specifying the HP as either specifically crank or RWHP. Just putting up a number and not specifying that it is crank is kind of misleading for the average joe/jane with little car knowlege. Me personally, I want to know RWHP as most people would.

Most people like us on this forum realize the difference between crank HP and RWHP. But I think car companies should start specifying the HP as either specifically crank or RWHP. Just putting up a number and not specifying that it is crank is kind of misleading for the average joe/jane with little car knowlege. Me personally, I want to know RWHP as most people would.

It's all marketing... Ford is going to be able to sell more GTs if it can say 300 hp vs 268.

Anyone have a dyno sheet of a stock 4.0L manual? Is the difference really that big between stick and automatic?

Based on what stlwagon said "general rule of thumb 12%loss for stick and 15% for auto"....I guess 3% difference between the two isn't really that big for the consistency and convenience of an auto. A lot depends on the tune as well. Take for instance if you put an auto with an aftermarket tune against a manual with a stock tune.